Council Okays Plan to Elect Seven-Member City Council

Council Okays Plan to Elect Seven-Member City Council

Compromise Combines 5 Single-Member Seats With 2 At-Large Posts

CENTRAL — After six public hearings over the past three months and a four-hour Council meeting Tuesday night, the Central City Council voted to adopt a new reapportionment plan using population numbers from the 2010 census.

Under the plan proposed by the Mayor’s study committee and offered by the committee chairman, Councilman Wayne Messina, the current five-member City Council would increase in size to seven members — the same number as the Central School Board.  Five of the members would be elected from five single-member districts, and two would be elected at-large citywide.  At present, all five City Council members are elected at large citywide.

The plan is a compromise between the desire to have all areas of the city represented through single-member districts and members elected with a citywide perspective at-large.

The issue produced a large turnout of citizens, representing a wide variety of opinions.

The reapportionment plan was approved by a vote of 3 to 2 with Mayor Pro-Tem Ralph Washington, and Councilmen Messina and Dr. Tony LoBue voting in favor and Councilmen Louis DeJohn and Aaron Moak voting against.

The measure now goes to Mayor Mac Watts for his signature or veto.  If he vetoes the ordinance and that veto is not overridden, the City Council would remain with five members elected at large.

Opponents of the reapportionment plan sent numerous speakers to the microphone, including five members of the Freneaux family, and they offered several amendments.  However, Councilmen Washington, Messina, and Lobue voted together throughout the night.

On Wednesday, Councilman Wayne Messina, the author of the plan, said, “I’m happy.  I feel comfortable with what was done.  We held numerous hearings, and the vote was in accordance with the majority of the people of Central.”

“Using both single-member districts and at-large representation beings together the best of both worlds.  It’s a true compromise, and I feel it’s one that will work well for Central,” he said.

More than 30 citizens went to the podium during the public hearing on the ordinance.  Here is a sample of some of their sentiments:

Jr. Shelton, a candidate for Mayor in the last election and a member of the committee, said, “The study committee had lots of participation and a very constructive and cooperative approach.  Its recommendation was not ‘inconclusive’ as some have reported but very clear in favor of five districts and two at-large.  Adding more representation is a good thing.”

Tom Belcher said, “We’re running a $1 million a year surplus and just had a study committee that saved another $500,000 a year on city services.  This will cost only $20,000 a year and provide better representation.  It’s well worth it.”

Ted McCulley said the compromise is similar to what the Founders favored when they created the Senate and the House with two senators from each state and House members based on population.  “It will give us better representation,” he said.

R. J. Saucier said, “Districts are the best but it does lead to polarization.  We need to balance that with Councilmen with a citywide perspective.  This is not an expansion of government as some have argued.  This creates no new employees or bureaucracy.”

Harry Rauls said, “The best economic development we can have is good, honest government, and having seven representatives on the Council will provide more people helping the city.”

Gil Matherne said, “Seven is better. It gets more people working for us.  In business, if I try to do everything myself, that doesn’t work.  Having a larger group of Councilmen is planning for the future.”

• But Mike Stevens favored electing Councilmen at-large citywide by divisions with Councilmen then assigned to represent a specific district.

Kandi Jones of CentralSpeaks suggested the real motivation of the plan was the reelection of incumbents.

T. J. Johnson said the plan should be submitted to the voters, but City Attorney Sherri Morris said that was impossible without a change in state law.

Paul Burns said the present five-member, at-large system is the best.  Sammy Rispone agreed that the present system was the best.

Jeannie Barnett also spoke in favor keeping five at-large.  “Creating districts will cause divisions,” she said.

Michele Freneaux supported having five districts.

Wade Giles said he favors having election by districts, whether it be five or seven.

Lucky Ross said he still favors all being elected at-large.

After the public hearing, the Council debated the measure.

Councilman Messina recounted the six public hearings his committee held and reported on his own investigation of the matter.  He spoke to Mayors and Councilmen in cities similar in size to Central, and they said a combination of single-member districts and at-large representatives is the best in their own experience.

Councilman Tony LoBue gave a slide show presentation analyzing the various options the city faces and concluded that a combination of districts and at-large works the best.  The graphic on Page 12 was one of his slides.  It compares what Louisiana cities are doing that are similar in size to Central.  Most have a mixed system.  LoBue also said his research showed five was a rather small number of Councilmen for a city the size of Central.

Mayor Pro-Tem Ralph Washington said all decisions of the Council should be made based on what is best for the community.  “The only reason I ran for the Council is to serve the community.  I work hard.  I do a lot of reading and a lot of research.  It’s not about money or power.  [Under the Lawrason Act] we actually have very little power.  So many things have been said that are hurtful.  I want this city to come together.  The last time we were united was the first Cookin’ in Central.  Think about Central and how to make it better.  In this case, why ask the committee members to dedicate so much time and then ignore their recommendations?”

Councilman Louis DeJohn spoke against the Messina plan and offered amendments to change it.

The first DeJohn plan would have created a five-member Council with five at-large divisions.  This was defeated 2-3 with only DeJohn and Moak voting for.

Councilman Aaron Moak offered an amendment to submit the proposed ordinance to a vote of the people.  However, City Attorney Sherri Morris said the Council has no power to submit such a referendum under present state law.  Moak said he was willing to go to the legislature and ask them to change state law for Central.  Moak’s amendment failed by the same 2-3.  Then DeJohn offered an amendment to have a five-member Council, all elected from districts.  This failed 2-3 also.

If Mayor Mac Watts signs the ordinance, the Council has to adopt proposed districts and submit the final plan to the Justice Department for approval under the Voting Rights Act.

By Woody Jenkins, Central City News

Twitter Digg Delicious Stumbleupon Technorati Facebook Email

Comments are closed.